That quick bit of shopping you did at the international airport in Delhi or Mumbai could prove costly in the future. Here's why
The Supreme Court has directed all the states and Union territories to establish a robust, independent and accessible grievance redressal mechanism specifically designed for prisoners with disabilities. The apex court said the mechanism shall ensure prompt registration, effective monitoring and timely resolution of complaints so as to safeguard the inmates from "systemic neglect, abuse and discriminatory practices". A bench of justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta said appropriate facilities be created to ensure that prisoners with disabilities have meaningful access to inclusive education within the jail system. "No inmate shall be deprived of the opportunity to pursue educational programmes solely on account of disability, and suitable adjustments shall be made to facilitate their effective participation," the bench said in its December 2 order. The bench passed the order on a petition seeking exhaustive directions for providing appropriate legal framework and facilities to pers
Sending a "strong message" that the Supreme Court is meant for the common man, Chief Justice of India Surya Kant on Saturday said a predictable timeline and a unified national judicial policy-based early decision of pending cases would be his priority. Speaking at the Hindustan Times Leadership Summit here, the CJI referred to access to justice, and said his priority is to ensure how to reduce the cost of litigation, and how to prescribe a reasonable timeline within which matters are decided. Asked about the independence of judiciary, Justice Kant referred to the constitutional philosophy of separation of powers, and said the Constitution has beautifully defined the respective roles of the judiciary, the legislature, and the executive, while ensuring that there is no overlapping. "My first priority will be a predictable timeline and a unified national judicial policy-based early decision of the pending cases. I am not saying elimination of all the arrears. That will never happen. Th
The Supreme Court has steadily shaped and reshaped the contours of freedom of speech and expression in the last 75 years, former Chief Justice of India BR Gavai said here on Friday. "The evolution of free speech jurisprudence in India reflects a larger constitutional commitment to ensure that the state's power to restrict expression does not overshadow the citizen's right to think, to speak and to participate freely in the democratic set-up," he asserted. He was delivering the Justice KT Desai Memorial Lecture 2025 on 'Freedom of Speech and Expression: Its Scope and Limitations Under the Constitution'. Citing several landmark judgments of the Supreme Court since Independence, the former CJI traced out the evolution of law over the years and role played by the judiciary in protecting citizen's rights. "Over the last 75 years, the Supreme Court has steadily shaped and reshaped the contours of the freedom of speech and expression under Article 19 1(A), while simultaneously defining ..
The Supreme Court declined a plea seeking regulation of AI in courts, saying judges already act with caution and do not allow technology to influence judicial decisions
The Supreme Court on Friday said it will intervene to resolve the ongoing deadlock over the selection of vice chancellors for two technical universities in Kerala if Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan and Governor-cum-chancellor Rajendra Arlekar do not reach a consensus. A bench of justices JB Pardiwala and PB Varale was hearing the matter related to the appointments of VCs of the APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University, and the University of Digital Sciences Innovation and Technology. The bench asked Attorney General R Venkataramani, appearing for the governor, and senior advocate Jaideep Gupta, representing the chief minister, to find out some amicable solution to the impasse. Venkataramani submitted that the Justice (Retd) Sudhanshu Dhulia committee had recommended two sets of names and the chancellor had picked two names. "The chief minister has some difficulty with some names. There are some common names," the AG said. Advocate Gupta said that the name, which is not acceptable
The Supreme Court on Friday refused to entertain a PIL seeking to curb the unregulated use of artificial intelligence and machine learning in the judicial system. The top court said it was aware of the ill effects of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) tools in the judiciary, but these issues can be appropriately addressed by it on the administrative side rather than through judicial directions. A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi heard senior advocate Anupam Lal Das, appearing for petitioner Kartikeya Rawal, who had sought safeguards against the risks posed by AI-generated content and its alleged misuse in judicial processes. The senior lawyer said the AI tools create non-existent judicial precedents or judgements and they finally become part of judicial pronouncements. While acknowledging the concerns, the CJI said this a lesson for the Bar and the judges both. It casts a duty on the lawyers and the judges to verify the AI .
The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to consider hearing a plea of the Tamil Nadu government challenging a Madras High Court order permitting devotees of the Arulmighu Subramaniya Swamy Temple to light traditional Karthigai Deepam lamp' at Deepathoon', a stone lamp pillar located on the Thiruparankundram hillock close to a dargah. A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi took note of the submissions of a lawyer, representing the state government, and said the plea will be considered for listing before a bench. As soon as the matter was mentioned, a counsel for the respondents accused the government of creating unnecessary drama merely to convey to the high court that the issue had been brought to the notice of the Supreme Court. The state counsel, however, maintained it was just mentioning the case. We will see, the CJI said. The Madurai bench of the Madras High Court on Thursday dismissed an intra-court appeal filed by the Madurai district collector a
The Supreme Court began hearing arguments on whether Yes Bank's 2020 write-off of ₹8,400 crore AT1 bonds was legally valid, a ruling that could reshape future bank resolutions
Amid reports of multiple BLO deaths during the electoral roll revision, the Supreme Court ordered states to deploy additional staff and consider exemptions on a case-by-case basis to reduce hardships
A two-judge bench of Justices N Kotiswar Singh and Manmohan made the observation and discharged a man, accused of intimidating the complainant by photographing and recording her on his phone
The Supreme Court on Thursday granted interim protection for a week to two petitioners facing demolition of properties in Uttar Pradesh, and directed that status quo be maintained by the parties till then. A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta asked the petitioners, who said that partial demolition of their residential or marriage hall premises was already carried out by the authorities, to approach the Allahabad High Court for appropriate order. The bench said it is granting interim protection for a week considering that partial demolition has already been affected. "Further considering the aforesaid fact, we grant interim protection for a period of one week from today as status quo would be maintained by the parties," the bench said. The top court made clear that interim protection granted by it would not influence the high court in entertaining the petition and considering the prayer for stay on its own merits. The bench passed the order while hearing a plea seeking
The Supreme Court on Thursday extended till April 22 next year its interim order staying proceedings against Congress leader Rahul Gandhi in a case related to his alleged derogatory remarks against the Indian Army during his 2022 Bharat Jodo Yatra. A bench of Justices M M Sundresh and Satish Chandra Sharma admitted the appeal filed by Gandhi, and said it will hear the matter in detail. The bench was hearing Gandhi's plea challenging a May 29 order of the Allahabad High Court dismissing his plea challenging the trial court's summoning order in the case. While hearing Gandhi's plea on August 4, the top court stayed till the next date of hearing further proceedings in the case pending before a court in Lucknow. "How do you get to know that 2,000 sq km of Indian territory has been occupied by Chinese? Were you there? Do you have any credible material?" the bench had earlier asked Gandhi about his alleged remarks. "Why do you make these statements without having any material? If you ar
Administrator argues 2020 write-off was valid under Basel III; court's ruling could force ₹8,400 crore repayment to bondholders
Supreme Court restored Muslim woman's right to get back cash, gold and other gifts given at her wedding, ruling that the 1986 law aims to protect the dignity and financial security of divorced women
The Supreme Court on Wednesday allowed on "humanitarian grounds" the entry of a pregnant woman and her eight-year-old child into India, months after they were pushed into Bangladesh. A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi asked the West Bengal government to take care of the minor and directed the chief medical officer of Birbhum district to provide all possible medical assistance to the pregnant woman Sunali Khatun. The bench noted the submission of Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, that the competent authority has agreed to allow the woman and her child into the country purely on humanitarian grounds and they would be kept under surveillance. The top court said they would eventually be brought back to Delhi from where they were picked up and deported to Bangladesh. Senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Sanjay Hegde urged the court that there were others also, including Sunali's husband who are in Bangladesh and need to be brought back to
RIL has also pleaded that the order passed by the international tribunal was binding on the parties under the terms of the production-sharing contract (PSC)
A bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi was informed that the ECI had already extended the original deadline from December 4 to December 11
The Tamil Nadu government has urged the Supreme Court to lift its October 13 order directing a CBI probe into the Karur stampede in which 41 people were killed and permit an investigation by the SIT constituted by the Madras High Court. The local police and the Special Investigation Team are fully competent to conduct a "fair, thorough, and impartial investigation" and no exceptional circumstances exist to direct central agency intervention, the state government said in a reply filed before the apex court. The state government submitted that the October 13, 2025 interim order directing a CBI probe under the monitoring of three-member supervisory committee has "virtually allowed the writ petition" even before notice on maintainability could be decided. The stampede on September 27 during a rally of Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam chief Vijay claimed 41 lives and left over 60 injured. According to the state government, the allegation of negligence or dereliction of duty on part of the Karur
The Supreme Court on Tuesday stayed trial proceedings against former Karnataka chief minister BS Yediyurappa in a sexual harassment case filed under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi passed the interim order while hearing Yediyurappa's plea challenging the Karnataka High Court's refusal to quash the case. Issue notice. Meanwhile, trial proceedings shall remain stayed, CJI Kant said. The bench said the notice was being issued primarily to consider remanding the matter back to the high court. Senior advocate Sidharth Luthra, representing Yediyurappa, said the high court had ignored key evidence and failed to consider statements suggesting that nothing as such happened during the alleged incident. There are certain statements which prosecution suppresses the high court ignored facts. He has been chief minister four times, Luthra said. How can you compel the high court to hold a mini trial, the